Restoration of company name: operational records and equitable grounds supported revival, subject to statutory compliance conditions.

A company may seek restoration of its name in the register under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 where it shows operational existence and a just and equitable basis for revival. The materials cited included financial statements, income tax return acknowledgments and GST returns, which were treated as evidence that the company was carrying on business. The text also notes that the strike-off process under Section 248 and Rule 7 of the Companies (Removal of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016 had been followed by the Registrar, but restoration was still found appropriate subject to compliance with pending statutory filings and prescribed conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the company was entitled to restoration of its name in the register of companies under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Analysis: The company produced financial statements, income tax return acknowledgment and GST return to show that it was operational and capable of carrying on business. The records also showed that the statutory framework for striking off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rule 7 of the Companies (Removal of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016 had been followed by the Registrar of Companies. On the materials placed, the Tribunal found that restoration would be just and equitable within the meaning of Section 252(3), while also requiring compliance with pending statutory filings and prescribed conditions.

Conclusion: The company was held entitled to restoration of its name in the register of companies, with consequential directions for revival and compliance.

---